almost a decade prior while enduring that abuse

[Ostap]

Ms Heard's acting coach, Kristina Sexton, testified that Ms Heard has difficulty crying when she is acting. You saw it. Ms Heard sobbing without tears while spinning elaborate, exaggerative accounts of abuse and everything going on in her mind, almost a decade prior while enduring that abuse.
Youtube

Hello, everyone. I have difficulty understanding the boldfaced part. First, "prior" is not used grammatically like that, is it? Second, I can't make sense of it.

 

[Tarheel]

The alleged abuse happened about ten years ago.

 

[Tarheel]

Second, I can't make sense of it.

Please don't say that again.

 

[probus]

Personally I don't care for that usage of prior, preferring earlier or before, but you will see it especially in journalism. It is not ungrammatical but it is what Fowler called a Wardour Street word. What Fowler was getting at is that a plain word is preferable to a fancy one.

 

[Ostap]

Please don't say that again.

Why, could you explain?

Personally I don't care for that usage of prior, preferring earlier or before, but you will see it especially in journalism. It is not ungrammatical but it is what Fowler called a Wardour Street word. What Fowler was getting at is that a plain word is preferable to a fancy one.

Even with "ago" it's still not clear. There is no verb in the main sentence that would refer to what happened 10 years ago.

 

[probus]

"...almost a decade prior.. " is a phrase which functions as an adverb, because it tells the reader when something was occurring.

 

[Ostap]

"...almost a decade prior.. " is a phrase which functions as an adverb, because it tells the reader when something was occurring.

I meant the main sentence - the whole part preceding the boldfaced phrase. The participial phrase "while enduring that abuse" must modify something. But there is nothing in the previous part to modify.

 

[probus]

Technically you are correct @Ostap, but I think it's only the punctuation that is wrong. If it was written as "You saw it: Ms Heard sobbing..." it would be okay in my opinion.

 

[Ostap]

Technically you are correct @Ostap, but I think it's only the punctuation that is wrong. If it was written as "You saw it: Ms Heard sobbing..." it would be okay in my opinion.

I meant what action/event that was happened in the past it refers to.
But now, rereading the sentence once more, it occured to me the boldfaced pharse modifies "going on". "In her mind" means "according to her", like, she perceives that it happened 10 years ago:

"everything (that was) going on (in her mind/as she believes) almost a decade ago"

Is my understanding correct?

 

[Tarheel]

@Ostap You said: "Second, I can't make sense of it."

I have to hope that you can understand my explanation. Otherwise, there is no point in offering it.

There is a big difference between saying you don't understand something and saying you can't understand that thing.

 

[Ostap]

@Ostap You said: "Second, I can't make sense of it."

I have to hope that you can understand my explanation. Otherwise, there is no point in offering it.

There is a big difference between saying you don't understand something and saying you can't understand that thing.

I am really confused about what's wrong with that ordinary phrase.

 

[Tarheel]

@Ostap If you really can't understand something there is nothing wrong with saying so. It means you can't figure it out. It's hopeless.

 

[Ostap]

Ah, it was about that! I thought it had something to do with being "rude" or something. I have always thought that if you can't understand something, it means that you tried to but failed. If you don't (understand), it doesn't necessarily suggest that. Also, if you can't (do something), doesn't mean you never will, it only describes the current moment.
But I may be wrong, it's just how I feel about it.

 

[jutfrank]

@Ostap You said: "Second, I can't make sense of it."

I have to hope that you can understand my explanation. Otherwise, there is no point in offering it.

I don't understand your point, Tarheel. There's nothing wrong with I can't make sense of it.

 

[emsr2d2]

I don't understand your point, Tarheel. There's nothing wrong with I can't make sense of it.

You took the words right out of my mouth.

 

[jutfrank]

Is my understanding correct?

I'm not sure I understand what you're asking. The abuse, and the enduring of it, happened (or not) almost ten years prior.

 

[Ostap]

I'm not sure I understand what you're asking. The abuse, and the enduring of it, happened (or not) almost ten years prior.

I was saying that the equivalent of the verb "happened" in the original phrase would be "going on". And the phrase "in her mind" indicates she (Amber Heard) now believes that it happened while (the speaker believes) it actually didn't.